Roberto dei Mattei still interprets Vatican Council II
irrationally, like the Rome Vicariate, Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernandez and the
parish priest at the church where he has his office in Rome.
That he goes for the Latin Mass makes no difference?
He wrote a book on Vatican Council II which was
Cushingite. He is still selling it.
There is no discussion or dialogue on this subject. - Lionel Andardes
JUNE 24, 2021
For Roberto dei Mattei at the conferences with the Franciscans of the Immaculate Vatican Council II was only a pastoral Council and not dogmatic : we now know it is in harmony with EENS when interpreted without the false premise
Roberto dei Mattei wrote a book on Vatican Council II in which he did not avoid the false premise.The book was written with the fake premise. He could have avoided the error if he knew about it.There is no correction or apology from him. He continues to interpret the Council with the error instead of without the error.He will not affirm Vatican Council II in harmony with Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).It's the same for Chris Ferrara,Michael Matt and the other
Lefebvrists.
The conferences with the Franciscans of the Immaculate, in which Vatican Council II was described as only a pastoral Council, was in error.Vatican Council II is a dogmatic Council in harmony with the strict interpretation of EENS, the Athanasius Creed with no exceptions and the Syllabus of Errors with no exception. - Lionel Andrades
APRIL 13, 2018
There is no apology or correction from Roberto dei Mattei and Christopher Ferrara for the books they wrote on Vatican Council II.They need to apologise for their ignorance, which was innocent.
There is no apology or correction from Roberto dei Mattei and Christopher Ferrara for the books they wrote on Vatican Council II.They need to apologize for their ignorance, which was innocent.There was no one there to correct them at that time.But now they know and should clarify that it was an error.
So in the books on Vatican Council II written by Ferrara and Mattei, Vatican Council II is projected as a rupture with Tradition since the writers mixed up what is invisible and as being visible.They then projected these unknowable people as being known examples of salvation outside the Church.
When they wrote their books, Vatican Council II could also have been projected as a continuity with Tradition and the dogma EENS.
So the Magisterium of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF), made a mistake at that time.Since the CDF Prefect assumed that unknown people were known it was an objective mistake.Since he assumed that people in Heaven saved, were visible on earth, it was a factual mistake.Since he assumed that people in Heaven were also present on earth at the same time,he violated the Principle of Non Contradiction.
The same mistake unknowingly, was made by Christopher Ferrara, Roberto dei Mattei, Fr. Nicholas Gruner, Attila Guimares, Michael Davies and Diterich von Hildebrand in their books and articles.
In their books they were saying that Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition.This was true.Since a false premise is used.The educated Catholic recognizes the non traditional conclusion.
Even Pope John Paul II was aware of the rupture with Tradition.However what was not known to also Fr.John Hardon, Fr. William Most, Monsgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton and other good apologists, was that the actual false premise was visible for us BOD,BOB and I.I and it caused the rupture with Tradition( EENS, Syllabus of Errors, past ecclesiology etc).
Now that Ferrara and Mattei know, there must be an apology or correction from them.Soon there will be the summer conferences of the traditionalists where the same error will be repeated,like in former years, even after being informed.-Lionel Andrades
No comments:
Post a Comment